“Globalization
is not only a matter of economic profit or political power, nor is it only
matter of the flow of information. Rather the new awareness of human
subjectivity and hermeneutics … manifest and even constitute new dimensions of
relatedness of peoples and the need for new ways of understanding them. Where
previously the issue was one of a contrived or instrumental cooperation between
people for external purposes, now in terms of a global whole the many can be
seen to be inherently related: the welfare of one must now be the concern of
all, and vice versa. This is the new cultural universe in which we are destined
to live.” (McLean G. 2003)

The role of philosophyin the process of globalisation must be more than that of “describing
what actually or effectively is…and what, given the logic or dynamics of the
process at work, likely to be.” (Madison G.B. 1998) It will not be enough to
restrict itself only to epistemological approach, as it has been the case in
many philosophical approaches to this process. This is more so when we are
confronted with such questions: “How can we re-establish the priority of
human, spiritual and communal values in the face of an overwhelming force of
economic necessity that now reaches to the remotest regions of the earth with
its monolithic or oligopolistic system, or a universal melting pot condensing
everything into one thing, money or financing, regardless of any … diversity?
Is there still room for liberation and humanization in this system that now
encompasses us all in a large economic pot kept in a constant stir for its own
benefit, no matter what happens to the less advantaged members of any society in
the process?” (Blanchett O. et al 2001)

Hence
“it is the task proper to philosophers beyond any others to understand and
explain this (globalisation) so that truly humane, peaceful and cooperative
decisions can be made in and for the future. (McLean G. 2003). Philosophy must
have to incorporate two of its essential pillars here viz: social and moral
philosophical pillars. That means being philosophically actively and adequately
involved in the process of globalisation. Judging from its “historic search
for unity in diversity …its task is (among others) to deepen the search in
each tradition for the prospects of dialogue in which each cultural identity is
respected, protected and promoted, whilebeing
called to respond from its resources to urgent shared needs.” (McLean G. 2003)

The central philosophical attention here
will be focused on the problems of pluralism and tolerance; dialogue vs.
hegemony and cooperation vs. conflict.

This
is so because while the proponents of globalisation are busy singing the praises
of the already accomplished goals of globalisation, it is becoming more evident
that we are being confronted more and more with sophisticated forms of
(economic, political and cultural) manipulations and hegemony.“ Writ
large in these global time it is the issue of the freedom of peoples vs. a
hegemony which subjects all peoples and nations, politically or culturally.
Further, if Huntington is correct in seeing civilizations as religiously based,
the possibility of the dialogue of religions is also key to clash or cooperation
between civilizations. What then is the role of philosophy in enabling such
inter-religious and inter-civilizational dialogue?” (McLean 2003)

The necessity of
dialogue is principally founded on our nature as human beings as well as the
diversity present in and around our human existence. Dialogue as a venture worth
its name is a challenge. Hence the need for the awareness of the nature and
extent of the task awaiting philosophers. But is it not exactly that which
challenges us that brings along with it new opportunities and fortunes. Hence we
can only reap the fruit of dialogue if we accept the challenges of dialogue.
Dialogue between cultures hence between human beings, with each other and among
themselves is one of the central points in philosophers’ efforts towards a
globalisation that will be able to act as a new integrating factor for
contemporary societies. This kind of dialogue needs to be “global, open and
circular.” The practice of true dialogue and its success belong to the needed
components of a worthwhile global cooperation or solidarity. Conflicts abound,
as it globally already proven, where instead of dialogue the practice of
hegemony in any of its different forms and disguises is located.

“The various
forms of human community raise questions of their interrelation. What can the
philosophical experience and creativity of the many peoples contribute to the
political philosophy of how peoples large and small can live together? Writ
small, this is the ability to bring together in harmony multiple minorities
within the one nation; it is also the classical … issue of pluralism and
tolerance in terms of large and small nations.” (McLean G. 2003). This calls
for tolerance for there can be no pluralism without tolerance. Being tolerant in
this context means accepting the other not because we have not succeededin coercing to abandon his/her standpoint or at worst
eliminating him/her. Rather because we are conscious of our own need of the
other and his/her wealth of experiences so as to be able to comprehend the truth
of our human existence, the universe as a whole. (BoffL1991).